SHARIAsource

The parties were married on 11 October 2009 and had one child. The plaintiff submitted that, after two years, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because the defendant:

1. had failed to provide the plaintiff with sufficient financial support;
2. would return home in the middle of the night, without first obtaining the plaintiff's permission;
3. was an alcoholic and a gambler;
4. had carried on an extra-marital affair with another woman;
5. would frequently direct unwarranted accusations at the plaintiff that she was having an extra-marital affair herself;
6. had incurred debts unbeknownst to the plaintiff; and
7. had neglected the plaintiff and the parties' child.

On 16 June 2012, after an argument regarding the defendant's outstanding debts, the defendant left the parties' home. He never returned and ceased all communications with the plaintiff. Familial attempts to bring the parties to reconcile their differences had been unsuccessful and, based on the plaintiff's submissions, the plaintiff was resigned to the fact that an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra) was the only feasible option remaining.

Despite the defendant's absence, the court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(b) and (f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(b) and (f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds that the parties had been separated for more than two consecutive years and ongoing conflict.

The applicant submitted that he had married his wife on 2 February 1985 in accordance with Islamic law. He and his wife had had four children. The applicant submitted that he planned to have his youngest daughter (15 years old) marry her 22 year old prospective husband (calon suaminya). The applicant submitted that his application was urgent because his daughter and her prospective husband were already close and he was concerned that they may conduct themselves in a manner contrary to Islamic law if they were not married immediately.

The court, pursuant to art 7(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage and art 49(1) of Law No. 59 of 2009, acceded to the applicant's request for marriage dispensation.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 April 2000 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 mayam of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children and no third party had ever sought to impugn the sanctity of their marriage. They had received a marriage certificate, issued by the Office of Religious Affairs, but it had been lost in the 26 December 2004 tsunami. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for civil administration purposes.

In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 14 August 1995 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had already registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs and received a marriage certificate. The parties, however, also requested that the court ratify their marriage for residency purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 15 June 2006 before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as the second applicant's marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been three mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had no children. They had not yet registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs because, at the time of their marriage, the Office of Religious Affairs was inactive due to post-tsunami reconstruction. The parties, therefore, requested that the court ratify their marriage for hajj administration purposes and other administrative requirements.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, Bughyatul mustarsyidin, page 298, and kitab Tuhfah, volume 4, page 132, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 September 1981 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been eight mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had not yet registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination in order to obtain a marriage deed (akta nikah).

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 20 December 2004 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's older brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been eight mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination in order to obtain a marriage deed (akta nikah) and for other administrative purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 18 December 2005 by a qadhi before two witnesses. The second applicant's younger brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been four mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a widower and the second applicant a widow. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination for administrative and other purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Tuhfah, volume 4, page 132, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. In acceding to the parties' request, the court found that, pursuant to arts 2(1) and 6 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and art 7(2) and (3)(b) of the Compilation Islamic law, the parties' marriage constituted an Islamic marriage agreement (aqad nikah).

The applicants submitted that they were married in accordance with Islamic law on 12 August 1983 by a marriage qadi (qadhi nikah) before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been four mayam worth of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. The parties had never divorced nor had they left Islam (murtad). There were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children. They had registered their marriage with the local village (gampong) but not yet with the Office of Religious Affairs and required a court determination for marriage administration and other administrative purposes.

The court cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, and Kitab Ushu al-Fiqh by Abdul Wahhab Khallaf, as examples of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 4 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married in 2000 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had two children. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs, as evidenced by a notice of rejection they had received, dated 11 January 2016, issued by the same office. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order that they could then obtain passports before undertaking the umrah.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 9 September 2009 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had one child. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs, as evidenced by a notice of rejection they had received, dated 22 January 2016, issued by the same office. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage before they could obtain a birth certificate for their child.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 15 October 1999 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a bachelor and the second applicant a virgin. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had three children. The parties had submitted the necessary documentation for the registration of their marriage to local village authorities but the documentation was never forwarded on to the Office of Religious Affairs. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order to obtain birth certificates for their children.

The court, pursuant to art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants. The court also cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, as an example of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 20 October 1983 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's older brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. At the time of the parties' marriage, the first applicant was a widower and the second applicant a widow. They had never divorced, no one had objected to their marriage, and there were no other prohibitions to their marriage under Islam or current laws. The parties had no children. The parties had never registered their marriage with the Office of Religious Affairs but required a court determination ratifying their marriage before they could embark on the hajj.

The court, pursuant to provision (a) of the elucidation to art 49 of Law No. 3 of 2006, and art 7(4) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, noted that a marriage ratification request can be submitted by the husband or wife. The court then, pursuant to art 2(1) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 16 May 2016. When they read their marriage certificate, however, they noticed that both their names had been recorded incorrectly. As evidence, the parties submitted their residency permits (Kartu Tanda Penduduk), which contained the correct spelling of their names. The parties requested that the court grant them dispensation to have their names recorded correctly on their marriage certificate. The court, pursuant to art 6(2)(a) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 34(2) of Minister of Religion Regulation No. 11 of 2007, acceded to the parties' application.

The applicants submitted that they were married on 6 April 2006 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The second applicant's older brother had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been five grams of gold. The parties had one child. The parties submitted that they required a court determination ratifying their marriage in order to obtain a birth certificate for their child.

The court, pursuant to art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the parties marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicants. The court also cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, as an example of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties.

The parties were married on 22 December 1994. At that time the plaintiff was a virgin and the defendant a bachelor. They had lived in their own home and had three children. The plaintiff submitted that the parties' marriage had been harmonious for 15 years, after which time it had become quarrelsome because the defendant had:

1. failed to provide the plaintiff with sufficient financial support to meet daily needs;
2. frequently gambled and used illicit drugs; and
3. frequently beaten the plaintiff and threatened her with a knife.

On 8 October 2014, the defendant left for Jakarta for two months, during which time he failed to provide the plaintiff with any financial support. When the plaintiff requested a divorce, the defendant returned to Takengon and threatened the plaintiff with a knife. Since that incident the parties had remained separated (for the past four months). Believing the parties had no other option but divorce, the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

After hearing from the plaintiff's witnesses, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request. The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties. The court also noted accepted evidence from the plaintiff that the defendant had previously been arrested for physically assaulting the plaintiff (domestic violence) on 28 June 2012.

The applicant submitted she had married Rudin bin Syeh Benu (deceased) on 16 November 1976 in accordance with Islamic shari'a before two witnesses. The applicant's uncle had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah) and the dowry (mahar) had been 10 grams of gold. The applicant and the deceased had had five children before the applicant's husband had died in 2003 due to illness. The applicant submitted that she required a court determination ratifying her marriage to the deceased before she could embark on the hajj.

The court, pursuant to art 14 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, ratified the marriage based on the evidence produced by the applicant. The court also cited Kitab l'anatu al-Thalibin, juz IV, page 254, as an example of Islamic norms that allow the ratification of a marriage based on facts such as those established by the parties.

The parties were married on 21 October 2009. Their apparent inability to conceive a child had caused tensions that had led the defendant to accuse the plaintiff of being infertile. As a result of the defendant's accusations, the parties had been separated for the past two years. The defendant had even divorced the plaintiff in writing on 21 October 2015. The plaintiff submitted that all the aforementioned reasons were reason enough for her to request an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

After hearing from the plaintiff's witnesses, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request. The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties.

The applicant submitted that she had married her husband on 24 December 1955 at her home in Banda Aceh, prior to the enactment of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage. The applicant's father had acted as her marriage guardian (wali nikah), two witnesses had been present, and the dowry (mahar) had been IDR 50. The respondent was the younger sibling of the applicant's husband as her husband had died on 24 October 2014 due to illness. The applicant and the deceased had had five children.

The applicant submitted that in order to administer her deceased husband's affairs, including accessing his superannuation/retirement fund, she required a determination from the court ratifying the marriage. Based on the facts presented by the applicant, the court acceded to her request and ratified the marriage.

The parties were married on 23 January 1986. Before marrying, the applicant was a bachelor and the respondent a virgin. They had lived with the respondent's parents for a year before moving into their own home in Kuala Simpang Ulim. While they had 11 children, their marriage had been quarrelsome after one year. The applicant submitted that this was because the respondent:

1. would ignore his advice;
2. was not a competent homemaker; and
3. when the parties would quarrel, would go quiet, thus making it difficult to resolve the problem.

On 19 April 2010, the parties separated after yet another argument. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had failed and the applicant, accordingly, requested that the court grant him a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i).

The respondent refuted the applicant's submissions, stating that it was the applicant who instigated their arguments, and that she would go quiet in order to prevent arguments. The respondent also stated that if the applicant were to divorce her she would require IDR 50,000 per day for iddah (three-month period after divorce has been granted).

After corroborating the applicant's submissions with information provided by two of the applicant's witnesses, the court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties. The court also ordered the applicant to pay to the respondent IDR 500,000 for iddah.